The Real Question

So what is the real question, really?

Dr. Colin Patterson, Senior Paleontologist, British Museum of Natural History, London, was giving a keynote address when he asked an interesting question.

"Question is: Can you tell me anything you know about evolution-any one thing that is true? I tried that question on the geology staff at the Field Museum of Natural History and the only answer I got was silence. I tried it on the members of the Evolutionary Morphology Seminar in the University of Chicago, a very prestigious body of evolutionists, and all I got was silence for a long time and eventually one person said, 'I do know one thing-it ought not to be taught in high school.'"

So, that is the real question. Next time someone tells you that this ridiculous fable of evolutionism is true, ask them if they can tell you anything they know about evolution-any one thing that they have personally verified as being true. If they have any level of respect for your intelligence, they will admit that they have no evidence. If they think you are an idiot, they will make some bogus statement about proof. Then, the choice is up to you whether you want to question their proof to it's inevitable logical end that their proof isn't proof of goo-to-you evolution.

Just ask Evolutionists to explain why they believe in Evolution. Make them explain why they believe every single point that they make. They make points as if they had evidence, but when you ask them for evidence, they will refer to a class they had or a book they read or claims such as, "Everyone knows this" or something else that indicates that they are making empty claims. Do not accuse them of making empty claims. Make them support their claims with things that they have actually seen and verified. They have verified nothing, I can assure you. They blow a lot of smoke, so that smoke will raise many questions in your mind. If they say that the such and so evolved, ask, what is the mechanism for the evolving? If they say that the mechanism is random chance, ask how that works specifically since the Second Law of Thermodynamics predicts that just the opposite will happen, that information will not be added.

They may try to use condescending language, implying that you are just too stupid to follow their thought process, but hang in their. When they use poor logic, ask about it rather than accuse. Ask, "Isn't that circular reasoning?" Ask, "I thought that evolution was a random process, but you say that evolution did this. Is it a random process or a thinking and reasoning creative entity?" If they say that every once in a while, information is added to the DNS by accident, then ask how they know. Have they observed it? No. Evolution has a troubling information problem. If they say that they know it because they read it somewhere or it was published in a scientific article, ask if they actually read the detail of the research behind the scientific article. The likelihood is that they have not even read the article. Ask them if there have any other reason for believing the scientific article other than blind "faith" in the article. Real faith is solid and not like the blind, baseless, faith of the ungodly. In fact, you will find that you never have anything to fear in asking Evolutionists these things. Behind their bold words there are just puffs of smoke. It takes real patience to talk to them, but if you keep your cool and really listen and question everything they say, they will lose their cool or run out of steam when they realize that they have spent their life following a mirage. They have been fooled and have probably fooled others as a result.

(Read the latest science on the subject: Without Excuse by Werner Gitt, a description of the scientific Laws of Universal Information. See also: Information Theory Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4. Here is another interesting article.) More is constantly being learned about information and about the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Evolutionists tend to hide in the weeds of the unknown with an argument from ignorance: "If you can't prove, by empirical science, that evolution is impossible, then it happened." By empirical science alone, we can only prove probabilities. The probabilities show the Big-Bang-Billions-of-Years-No-Flood-Molecules-to-Man story to be a bazaar hypothesis, a story that is so improbable that it should not be considered. However, empirical science is not a tool that can prove anything to be true or false absolutely. For absolute proof, we have revelation. (See Basic and Concise Guide to Practical, Useful Logic and Reasoning). God says that He created everything. He is the One Who enforces the laws of nature. He is the One Who will judge all of us in the end. We know that because we know Him presonally through the indwelling Presence of Jesus Christ and the moment-by-moment instruction of the Holy Spirit.

It is important that you do this in love. That means that you need to keep acknowledging Jesus in your heart. He will lead you and guide you. Don't expect that you can convert a dogmatic Atheist. It could be that all you can do is give a true witness so that when they stand before the throne of God, the Judge of all mankind, they will have no excuse. They will say, "No one told me." The Judge will say, "That is a lie. I spoke to you directly through my servant, (insert your name here)."

One Atheist, after over an hour of listening/questioning and him talking, said, "I guess I'm just making it up." A professor, after months of dialog, said: "Well, if you want proof in the form of empirical evidence, real observation, and sound logic, it's not available." He went on to tell this lie: "Nothing of any real interest can be proven by empirical evidence, real observation, and sound logic." Of course, if that were true, then we could not build a building or make an airplane or design and manufacture a car. All of these are based on empirical evidence, real observation, and mathematical logic rather than flimflam.

The scientists who see creation and the scientists who see evolution are looking at the exact same evidence.

So what are we really comparing here? What is the choice? The choice is simply this: Do you believe the historical account of the Bible--do you believe God, or do you believe the made-up stories of the evolutionists. That is the crux of the argument. Your answer will be based on your attitude toward God. Science has nothing to do with it unless you re-define science. Evolutionists tend to define science as Naturalism, Materialism, or Evolutionism for this very reason. The real question is this: Do you love God? Based on your answer to this real question, you will decide whether to believe in Evolutionism of to believe in the Creator.